Acceso usuarios
What remains of the idea of constitutional pluralism in the wake of the Euro‐crisis? According to the new anti‐pluralists, the recent OMT saga signals its demise, calling to an end the tense stalemate between the ECJ andthe German Constitutional Court on the question of ultimate authority. With the ECJ's checkmate, OMTrepresents a new stage in the constitutionalisation of the European Union, towards a fully monist order. Sinceconstitutional pluralism was an inherently unstable and undesirable compromise, that is both inevitable and tobe welcomed. It is argued here that this is misguided in attending to the formal at the expense of the materialdimension of constitutional development. The material perspective reveals a deeply dysfunctional constitutionaldynamic, of which the judicial battle in OMT is merely a surface reflection. This dynamic now reaches a criticalconjuncture, encapsulated in the debate over ‘Grexit’, and the material conflict between solidarity and austerity.Constitutional pluralism, in conclusion, may be an idea worth defending, but as a normative plea for the co‐existence of a horizontal plurality of constitutional orders. This requires radical constitutional re‐imaginationof the European project.
